No abstract

as a means of reinforcing rules and operational procedures upon employees (IAEA, 1986). The report describes "nuclear safety culture" as a "reinforcement process which should be used in conjunction with the necessary disciplinary measures (IAEA, 1986, p. 9)." From this perspective, the intent of having a safety culture was to "foster an atmosphere" where demanding practices were seen as a benefit (e.g., tedious quality checks) as opposed to a hindrance for employees.Although the INSAG-1 report used the term safety culture to describe a general issue of rule compliance that could be present in any nuclear power plant, the term was used by some governments to support the claim that a Chernobyl-type incident could not happen in their country. For example, Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), headquartered in France, produced a report concerning Chernobyl (OECD, 1987) arguing that member states have a superior safety culture than that of the Soviet Union and that no action in this area was necessary. They argued that OECD member countries had a good safety culture due to their operator qualification systems, good control room design, effective control of operator behavior, and effective regulatory oversight. In short, they argued that safety culture was a Soviet problem and that no actions were required by OECD countries. It is interesting to note that neither the INSAG-1 nor OECD reports define safety culture, even though the OECD report contains a glossary of terms.

No abstract